Showing posts with label Mass struggle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mass struggle. Show all posts

Thursday, February 1, 2024

Scholar, Activist, Critic, and Historian Henry A. Giroux On the Grave Necessity of Speaking Out Against, Standing Up To, and Defeating Fascism in the 21st Century--At Home and Abroad

 WHAT IS FASCISM?
"Fascism is a system of political authority and social order intended to reinforce the unity, energy, and purity of communities in which liberal democracy stands accused of producing division and decline...a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”
—Robert Paxton, “The Anatomy of Fascism"
  
 

Silence Is Dangerous in the Current Age of Rising Fascism in the US

Social movements are creating powerful new languages for confronting tyranny. We must resist the plague of silence.

PHOTO: Former president Donald Trump speaks to the media outside a polling location at Londonderry High School in Londonderry, New Hampshire, on January 23, 2024. Jabin Botsford / The Washington Post via Getty Images

This week’s revelation that Donald Trump is already plotting new ways to try to put himself permanently above the law is just the latest reminder of the looming threat of lawless and emboldened right-wing forces in the United States. Trump’s new scheme to expand a Nixon-era policy memo to prohibit the Justice Department from prosecuting presidents, even after they leave office, is just a tiny hint of the greater threat. In recent months, several scholars have sounded the alarm that the United States is “sleepwalking towards authoritarianism.” The concern is not unfounded given that in his run for the presidency in 2024, Trump has boldly telegraphed his aspirations to impose an authoritarian future on the United States. He has repeatedly injected authoritarian language, extremist ideas and threats of violence into the mainstream. Moreover, he has done so to “create a climate of trepidation and powerlessness that discourages mobilization by the opposition,” in the words of scholar Ruth Ben-Ghiat. Forecasting his authoritarian intentions, Trump has openly stated that he intends to terminate portions of the U.S. Constitution, calls his political enemies “vermin” and boldly proclaims he will make himself a dictator “on day one.” On Truth Social, he claimed without irony that a president should have blanket authority and total immunity “even for events that ‘cross the line.’” He has repeatedly stated that if he regains the White House, “it will be a time for retribution” and revenge.

Taking pages from Hitler’s speeches, Trump has also said that the biggest threat to the United States “is from within.” In this instance, he reproduces a version of McCarthyite slander with his claim that the country is being overrun by “communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country, that lie and steal and cheat on elections, and need to be rooted out.” His constant attacks on what he labels as the “enemy within” are meant to incite his MAGA followers to wage violence against people of color, critics, progressives, LGBTQ+ Americans, news networks, immigrants, feminists, and any other group that does not buy into Christian nationalist, white supremacist views.

Trump’s discourse overflows with the genocidal language used in the Third Reich. The historian Heather Cox Richardson rightly notes that Trump’s “use of language referring to enemies as bugs or rodents has a long history in genocide because it dehumanizes opponents, making it easier to kill them. In the U.S., this concept is most associated with Hitler and the Nazis, who often spoke of Jews as ‘vermin’ and vowed to exterminate them.”

Trump has claimed that immigrants “are poisoning the blood of our country” and polluting his notion of white Christian culture, and he’s indicated that, if reelected, he plans to make them undergo “ideological screening” in order to enter the country legally (assuming here that he wants to make sure they would not vote for the Democratic Party). If his vision were carried out, millions of undocumented immigrants would be barred from the country while others would be rounded up, put into what amount to Gulag camps, and subjected to unimaginably harsh policies. Given Trump’s calls to shoot shoplifters, impose death penalties on drug dealers, and his suggestion that his former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, “deserves to be executed,” there is no reason to doubt Trump’s authoritarian designs.

On the campaign trail, Trump repeatedly echoes the language of autocrats such as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who embraces the concept of “illiberal democracy,” and claims, as The Guardian points out, that the biggest threat to Hungary and other nations is “the ‘mixing’ of European and non-European races.” Trump and the GOP, like many of the authoritarian politicians they admire, believe that equality is a weakness endemic to democracy and destroys society. Trump’s contempt for the law and desire for absolute power is not only evident in his remarks about wanting to be a dictator; it was also on full display when his legal team argued before a D.C. Circuit Court that unless Trump is impeached, he could not be held responsible for “selling pardons, military secrets, or simply having people assassinated.” As Thom Hartmann put it, “Trump’s lawyer argued before the DC Appeals Court that if Trump became president again, he could order SEAL Team Six to assassinate Joe Biden or Liz Cheney and nobody could do anything about it.” While Trump’s lawlessness is central to his grab for unchecked power, there are also displays of the delusions and aspirations of a Nazi-infested politics.

What is especially disturbing about the emerging fascism in the United States is the lack of general public outrage that accompanies it. Such silence extends from almost the entirety of the Republican Party, the mainstream media, 84 percent of white Evangelicals, and a number of the wealthiest American billionaires and corporate tycoons. While the Democratic Party, including President Joe Biden, have called out Trump as a fascist, they have been silent about their support for decades of neoliberal economic policies, the ravages of deindustrialization, a staggering rise in economic inequality and cuts to social programs. Such policies have produced the conditions that have accelerated the rise of authoritarianism in the United States. Wedded to the interests of the banks, corporate ideology and the financial elite, their silence should come as no surprise. At the same time, such policies have produced enormous economic hardships and a diminished sense of agency that creates an enforced silence among the most impoverished populations and often results in their inevitable retreat from politics, especially in relation to voting in national elections.

In the current historical moment, language has increasingly forfeited its obligation to a politics of truth, justice, equality and freedom, and in doing so has turned cannibalistic and cruel. As political horizons and public life wither under the assault of an emerging fascism and a mainstream media that refuse to confront it, language appears to fail in the presence of what Zygmunt Bauman called “the emergence of modern barbarity.” A continuing series of crises — political, cultural, economic and ecological — are translated into emotional plagues of fear, lies and violence produced by right-wing spectacles that have undermined the ability of the U.S. public to address critically the endless attacks by tyrannical forces on democratic ideas, values and institutions. Matters of historical context, interconnections, informed judgment and critical analysis that refuse to divorce themselves, in the words of Winifred Woodhull, “from social institutions and material relations of power and domination” are either ignored or disappear from public view. Language in the age of gangster capitalism and fascist politics is under siege, functioning less as a vehicle of audacious truth and moral witnessing than as a tool to purge democracy of its ideals. In the face of a politics of enforced silence, the United States is experiencing an era marked by what Brad Evans calls “a closing of the political,” grounded in the assumption that “nothing can be done.”

The poisonous shadow of authoritarianism has entered the public imagination in spectacular fashion as a normalized political discourse. A boisterous creed of “annihilating nihilism” marked by a politics of vacuousness, resentment, historical amnesia, self-interest and freedom from responsibility has become a dominating force in U.S. politics. A right-wing vocabulary of hatred, bigotry, lies and conspiracy theories has produced a brutalizing politics whose rhetoric and polices echo a dark and horrifying period of history unlike anything we have seen since the 1930s in Europe. The mobilizing passions of fascism are now being produced, circulated and legitimated though all aspects of the mass media, which are increasingly under the control of a billionaire class. How else to explain not only Trump’s public courting of white supremacists and antisemites, such as Nick Fuentes and Kanye West, but also Nikki Haley’s claim that slavery was not the cause of the Civil War? Such comments reveal the GOP’s fascist tendency not only to whitewash and seek to erase the relevance of the history of racism, but also to endorse the poisonous ideologies of white nationalism and white supremacy. As Czech dissident Václav Havel once remarked, “the disorder of real history is replaced by the orderliness of pseudo-history.… Instead of events, we are offered non-events.”

Diverse social movements … produced a language that allows us to recognize ourselves as agents, not victims.

Extremist language that was once considered unimaginable and relegated to fringe groups has been elevated to the center of power, politics and everyday life. For instance, billionaire Elon Musk’s recent racist comments echo the racial eugenicist movements in the U.S. in the 19th and 20th centuries, from which Hitler took inspiration. Yet, little is said in the mainstream press connecting Musk’s comments to a shameful past that gave us the Tuskegee experiments and provided a rationale for Jim Crow and racial segregation laws. Enforced silence is a tool for the repression of history and the wiping out of historical consciousness and memory, especially those moments in history we associate with segregation, exploitation, disposability and genocide. Fascist discourse is currently abetted and affirmed by ongoing public displays of the detritus of fascist politics, which makes visible that which the United States has forgotten and of which it should be ashamed — that is, a society in which collective morality and the ethical imagination appear to no longer matter.

Beyond bold and unapologetic public displays of fascist rhetoric, beliefs and policies, there are relentless right-wing assaults against democracy that are barely recognized in the media and in public discourse for the danger they pose to democracy. A short list includes book censorship, turning libraries into student detention centers, voter suppression laws, threatening election workers, assaulting reproductive rights, enacting cruel policies against queer and trans people and harassing critical educators. In addition, schools are turned into indoctrination centers, torrents of propaganda replace facts, history is whitewashed, dissent is suppressed and those who provide medical care to trans people and people in need of abortions are criminalized.

These authoritarian aggressions have become embedded in United States culture to the degree that they fail to garner any alarm or concern from the wider public. As fascist beliefs, values and language multiply, so do attacks by far right politicians, reactionary pundits and white supremacists against diversity, equality and inclusion, all the while promoting a white nationalist notion of who counts as a citizen. As Toni Morrison once noted, this is a language constrained by the “weary and wearying vocabulary of racial domination.” It is “a dead language” trapped in sordid silence regarding the racist ideology that drives its claims to “exclusivity and dominance.”

A dangerous silence now often accompanies a language at war with democratic ideals and the public imagination. This is an enforced silence among the larger public that purposely mutes matters of critical agency, moral responsibility, reason, justice and the demands of keeping alive a substantive democracy. It is a language where moral outrage disappears, is silenced or both, while concealing the danger that this fascist language portends. This is a depoliticizing silence that clouds lies and untruths in mindless theater, spectacles and a flood of evasions. Under such circumstances, community is emptied of any substance, reduced to notions of the social organized around the merging of lies and violence. The loneliness and social atomization produced under neoliberalism provide fodder for the dictatorial energies that offer forms of the false promise of community rooted in hate, bigotry and lies, often resulting in habitual ignorance to justice. Mainstream institutions such as schools, the media and online platforms that should trade in imaginative ideas and provide a critical culture are under siege. One consequence is the breakdown of civic culture, egalitarian values and politics itself. What many Americans fail to realize is that this reactionary mode of silence is a form of complicity that creates a political climate marked by cruelty, violence and lawlessness. How else to explain the lack of public outrage against an extremist Republican Party that rejects free summer lunch programs for food-insecure youth, weakens child labor laws and restricts voting rights?

Liberal and conservative Americans are immersed in a crisis of silence that ignores the fact that politicians such as Trump embrace totalitarian values — the language of dictators — and advocate for violence as a tool of political opportunism. This is not to suggest that all forms of silence function to erase the scourge of racism, white supremacy and the misery imposed by neoliberal capitalism.

Silence can be contemplative, offer consolation, and provide the space for close analysis, thinking critically and mobilizing modes of critical agency. However, in an era marked by a massive flight from ethical and political responsibility, a particular kind of administered silence emerges, one that subverts any sense of critical agency and abandons a more noble message regarding a warning of the dangers to come and the lessons to be addressed. Under such conditions, silence operates increasingly within oppressive relations of power. Tyrannical relations of power are now at the center of U.S. politics and radiate a contempt for dissent, integrity, compassion and liberty which, as Bauman notes in his book Babel, ejects “any sense of critical agency and [refuses] to recognize the bonds we have with others.”

In the face of injustice, silence has become ethically mute, and exhibits a dehumanizing indifference to human suffering in the midst of dangerous politics. Enforced silence, both as a subjective stance and as a political space of organized moral irresponsibility and self-deception, increasingly legitimates and helps to produce a society that has lost its moral bearings and wallows in a repudiation of civic courage and human rights. This current politics of enforced silence is happening at a time when many Americans seem oblivious to the threat posed to democracy by Trump, the GOP, far right foundations, reactionary cultural apparatuses and neoliberal educational institutions.

Silence today has become part of a politics of disappearance where critical ideas are buried along with dangerous memories, and the bodies of journalists, poets and those who lead the fight against oppression in its diverse modes. As Spanish painter Francisco Goya once warned of the degree to which truth and informed judgments are overcome by ignorance, superstition and falsehoods, “the sleep of reason produces monsters.” Martin Luther King Jr. gave a contemporary valence to Goya’s warning in his famous 1967 speech, “Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break the Silence.” His words alerted Americans to the dangers of refusing to speak out in the face of militarism, racism and massive poverty. Stating that “a time comes when silence is betrayal,” King was clear regarding how the refusal to speak out eviscerates both the idea of democracy and the promise of resisting the mobilizing passions of fascism, especially militarism, poverty and racism. The challenge posed by King’s call to resist a complicitous silence in the face of injustice is exceptionally relevant today. At the heart of this challenge is the need to not only make detectable the current threats to democracy but also to understand how silence in the face of tyranny legitimates authoritarianism along with the risks it poses to any viable notion of justice, equality and freedom.

It is important to note that fascism not only arrives through the language of hate, bigotry, dehumanization and military dictatorships as it did in Chile and Argentina in the 1970s; it also arrives through the everyday acceptance of an ethically debilitating silence. In the current moment, such silence accompanies authoritarian threats to democracy. A politics of silence facilitates a tsunami of manufactured ignorance advanced by the repression of dissent, the cowardice of the mainstream media, the unaccountability of social media platforms steeped in the astonishing toxicity of hatred, and a disdain for equality, freedom and truth in a society, notes Jonathan Crary, governed by the corrupting force of the billionaire elite.

Given the current threat posed to U.S. democracy, enforced silence should be analyzed within the uniquely current threats to liberty, basic human rights and equality that sabotage any viable notion of democracy. Such a challenge is especially crucial at a time when the habits of democracy are being replaced by what David Graeber called the “habits of oligarchy, as though no other politics are possible.” The politics of silence increasingly works through multiple sites and seemingly contrasting impulses, often aligning itself with a reactionary disdain for the public good. In part, it does so by refusing to address the growing (yet to some, seemingly unrelated) issues of Trump’s full embrace of fascist politics, the growing attacks on freedom of expression and the struggle for social justice.

This is all the more reason to reclaim the language of the common good; to protect public and higher education from a fascist takeover; to reject the privatization of public goods; expand the power of unions and the rights of workers, people of color, women, immigrants, queer and trans people, and all those others considered excess and disposable. The plague of silence has to be broken so as to inject the struggle for human rights back into the language of politics, and to fight for a socialist democracy built on the anti-capitalist values of equality, social justice, liberty and human dignity. The words of Frederick Douglass are prescient here and worth remembering. He writes:

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its mighty waters.

If the plague of silence is to be overcome, Americans need to tap into a language that makes clear that they will not look away or refuse to stand up in the face of fascist aggression. The brilliant writer Maaza Mengiste argues for such a language with his call for a vocabulary that “will take us from shock and stunned silence toward a coherent, visceral speech, one as strong as the force that is charging at us.”

Fortunately, especially since the Occupy movement in 2011, a number of social movements have emerged to provide a language that both exposes and makes the ruthless power of the financial elite and other anti-democratic forces accountable through a discourse of critique and hope. The Occupy movement made the discourse of inequality and class differences a more central part of a national political narrative. In the last decade, workers have used the language of economic justice, solidarity and fair play to reenergize the labor movement. The resurgence of the labor movement provided a discourse that exposes how neoliberalism benefits the wealthy and privileged.

Silence has become the language through which people are either depoliticized or are willingly complicit with the economic and racial forces of totalitarianism.

Meanwhile movements such as the movement for Black lives have highlighted the language of structural racism along with making visible a history of slavery, racial abuse and police violence, and crafting a nuanced and multidimensional discourse of liberation.

The #MeToo movement created new discourses to make visible the pervasive extent of sexual assault, violence and harassment across a wide variety of sites and greatly advanced gender justice.

The abolitionist movement has provided a contextual and relational language highlighting the punitive nature of highly racialized criminal legal system and the carceral state while instituting a national movement to defund the police.

Trans and queer people have invigorated a movement and language that critiques the right-wing weaponization of marginalized and ostracized identities.

Climate activists have exposed the danger fossil fuels pose to the planet, and how the most vulnerable populations, especially Black and Brown communities, pay a heavy price for the abuses of the oil and gas industries. In doing so, they have inserted the language of climate justice into the public sphere and made clear how capitalism is creating a murderous future for human beings by destroying the environment.

Black and Brown theorists working with the idea of intersectionality have provided a new language highlighting how every social movement is “shaped by multiple intersecting inequalities and power dynamics,” which draw “attention to unmarked categories” of both oppression and resistance. All of these movements have imaginatively offered a new language of politics and continue to further expand and sharpen such discourses.

Equally promising is the increased political activism of young people, who are voicing a language and pedagogy of disruption, critique and possibility. As I stated more than a decade ago in Truthout, theirs is a language “that recognizes that there is no viable politics without will and awareness and that critical education motivates and provides a crucial foundation for understanding and intervening in the world.” Young people recognize that they have been written out of the script of democracy for too long and are now creating spaces and enacting a language in which to expand individual and social agency through collective forms of resistance as starting points to build a new democratic social order.

Fortified with the energy and language of these dynamic movements, it is incumbent upon the broader left and its various social movements to continue to develop a language that not only highlights social injustices but also includes a vocabulary that moves people, allows them to feel compassion for “the other” and gives them the courage to talk back. Beyond highlighting the wide range of social injustices, all of us on the left must continue to develop a vocabulary that speaks to people’s needs in a way that is moving, affirming, recognizable and enables them to confront the burden of conscience in the face of the unspeakable, and to do so with a sense of dignity, self-reflection and the courage to act individually and collectively in the service of a radical democracy.

One important contribution of these diverse social movements is that they all produced a language that allows us to recognize ourselves as agents, not victims. In doing so, they have expanded the discourse of radical democratic politics. Of course, there is more at stake here than a struggle over meaning; there is also the struggle over power, over the need to create a formative culture that will produce new modes of critical agency and contribute to a broad social movement that will translate meaning into a fierce struggle for economic, political and racial equality. While there is a new energy among youth and a number of powerful social movements, there is the ongoing challenge of confronting with renewed vigor a culture of silence and indifference that has become the most powerful educational force of the emerging fascism.

Writing about the civil rights struggles of the ‘60s, Martin Luther King Jr. was prescient in acknowledging that the tyranny and violence of authoritarianism feeds on silence, moral apathy and the collapse of conscience. Given the fierce urgency of the times, the struggle against an enforced silence is especially crucial when people refuse to speak up in the face of injustice. Silence has become the language through which people are either depoliticized or are willingly complicit with the economic and racial forces of totalitarianism. As King notes, it is the language of those “who accept evil without protesting against it.”

The new social movements in the face of an emerging fascism have done us a great theoretical and political favor in making clear that any viable mode of resistance must embrace a language that translates into power — a critical language that expands the power of education, agency and resistance. This is a language that imaginatively rethinks the forces of militarism, capitalism, racism and sexism in light of the dramatic changes taking place technologically, culturally and politically. There will be no justice or democracy in the United States unless a mass multiclass social movement emerges that combines political and individual rights with economic rights — that joins a movement for gender and racial equality with a movement for economic justice.

At the same time, many new social movements need to further a language that is not only theoretical and critical but also passionate. In many ways, they do this, but a politics of passion needs a greater place in their politics. Central to such a language is a politics of emotion that addresses what Ruth Ben-Ghiat refers to as communities of belonging. This is a language that invites joy while mobilizing emotions that embrace compassion, justice and hope. What might be called a politics of identification and emotion is particularly important at a time when many people living in a neoliberal society are atomized, feeling alienated, lonely, invisible, and subject to far right emotional appeals to forms of allegiance rooted in hatred, bigotry and a poisonous nationalism.

Anand Giridharads claims that today’s left is often too cerebral and too suspicious of what he calls empowering emotional appeals. He writes that much of the left today is “suspicious of the politics of passion” and “doesn’t do emotional appeals,” adding:

Can those who defend the rule of law and pluralism and economic justice and human rights not only articulate those ideas but also appeal to the more basic human needs to belong, to have anxieties soothed, to have fears answered, to feel hope, or just to feel something at the end of bleak and tedious days?… In an era [of anxiety and future dread] such as this, leaving the politics of emotion, of passion, to aspiring autocrats is a dangerous abdication.

It is worth emphasizing that the struggle against fascism and for a socialist democracy will not take place if education is not made central to politics. Any attempt to further the language of social, economic and racial justice will not be effective if it does not construct a language of critique, possibility and desire. We need a language that pedagogically moves people, makes power visible and creates communities of belonging, justice and compassion. We need to continue to fight aggressively the plague of silence with what Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak argues is “the power to think the absent.” It is only then that a critical public consciousness can be awakened, and a multiracial working-class movement can begin to bring into fruition a democratically socialist society.

 

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

 

Henry A. Giroux currently holds the McMaster University Chair for Scholarship in the Public Interest in the English and Cultural Studies Department and is the Paulo Freire Distinguished Scholar in Critical Pedagogy. His most recent books include: American Nightmare: Facing the Challenge of Fascism (City Lights, 2018); The Terror of the Unforeseen (Los Angeles Review of books, 2019), On Critical Pedagogy, 2nd edition (Bloomsbury, 2020); Race, Politics, and Pandemic Pedagogy: Education in a Time of Crisis (Bloomsbury 2021); and Pedagogy of Resistance: Against Manufactured Ignorance (Bloomsbury 2022). Giroux is also a member of Truthout’s Board of Directors. 


 

 
 
 

Friday, January 26, 2024

What Does It Mean To Be Palestinian Now?

https://www.thenation.com/article/world/what-does-it-mean-to-be-palestinian-now/

Feature  

The Nation
January 25, 2024

What Does It Mean to Be Palestinian Now?

After October 7, this question has become a matter of grave importance, amid crackdowns on free speech and protest. Five writers reflect on the state of Palestinian life today.

Noura Erakat, Ahmed Moor, Noor Hindi, Mohammed El-Kurd, and Laila Al-Arian

For generations, the voices of Palestinians have been routinely overlooked. When we do turn to them, it is usually to ask them to justify their despair or prove their worthiness as humans—and to teach us the very basics of a generations-long crisis of forced exile and violent displacement.

Instead of making Palestinians play out that endless cycle one more time, we wanted to get to the heart of a question that feels more vital, more essential, in our moment.

The contributors to this section are Palestinians living in the US, where the war reverberates with terrifying intimacy even though the bloodshed is thousands of miles away. It is also where the need to hear from Palestinians—and to listen to what they have to say—has never been as critical, or as fraught.

So what does it mean to be Palestinian now? It’s a question whose answer we know will keep changing in the months and years ahead. But we have to keep asking it.
—The Editors

 

Cease-fire now: An installation at the National Mall in Washington, D.C.
Cease-fire now: An installation at the National Mall in Washington, D.C. (Leigh Vogel / Getty Images )

A Day in the Life

Noura Erakat

Noura Erakat
(Leigh Vogel/Getty Images)

It’s the sound that guts me. The mama grasping her baby boy wrapped in a white shroud, moaning in shock. A little girl curled up next to the wheels of a stretcher holding her father. Between her cries, we hear her implore, “Baba!” There is also the father with skinny arms, still in his slippers, covered in ash, screaming his children’s names one by one. He turns over a piece of shattered concrete searching for his babies, but there is nothing but wreckage.

Palestinians are certainly not the first people to endure genocide, but they are most certainly the first to have it broadcast in real time. How pathetic that we can’t stop this. Every night I make a single wish: Please let us wake to news of a cease-fire. But in the morning, when I pick up my phone, I already know what I see will keep me up another night.

I’m barely up, and my phone is already ablaze with requests. I won’t be able to respond to all of them. My title—human rights attorney—gives the impression that I have a law practice. A Palestinian family from Gaza has arrived in Cairo; 46 members have been killed. They want to sue Israel and need help. A journalist friend writes from Gaza. His employer is demoting him for being “anti-Israel,” as he and his family scramble to find food and shelter. What can he do? I frantically try to respond. It never feels like enough.

Besides work and protests, I only leave home for my daughter’s sake. She always asks me to put away my phone. She explains her poor test score is a result of her baba and me “talking about the war too much.”

I broke my self-imposed isolation to take her to a school Halloween party. I joked with one of the parents that my costume was a Palestinian pretending to be OK. She didn’t laugh. Ever since 6-year-old Wadea Al-Fayoume was stabbed 26 times by his family’s landlord, I have been acutely afraid for my daughter’s safety and anxious that my public-facing work could cause her harm. I stay in costume and pretend everything is OK.

I marvel at the sky: How lucky we are it does not fall and crush us without announcement.

The requests for comment from journalists and TV producers start to pile up. I wade through them on my commute to campus. I’m usually calm with the media, but these days I’ve been livid about their coverage and exhausted by the cable networks that have blacklisted me or refused to post my interviews. A TV producer who invites me to appear on his show several times but then never has me on writes to share that he is “trying to connect with Hamas leaders Ghazi Hamad and Osama Hamdan.” He asks, “Do you have their contact info?” I am boiling.

In my pre-interview prep with the BBC, a producer asks me how Palestinians feel about Hamas, and I snap: “You know that’s a racist question, right?”

“I’m just trying to help,” she says, “because not all Palestinians are Hamas.”

“What does it matter what Palestinians feel? Their ideas don’t alter their 
civilian status; nothing justifies a genocide. You’ve never asked a single Israeli what they feel about their government. You didn’t even ask if Americans supported Bush when his administration invaded Iraq…”

“OK, thank you. I’ll talk to the team and get back to you.”

I know she won’t call back. So I send a text suggesting other Palestinians she should call. I’m so mad at myself that I may have lost this opportunity for Palestinians to be heard.

In class, I walk a tightrope. I want my students to ask me about what’s happening. I want to tell them how lucky we are to have classrooms, how hundreds of schools in Gaza have been destroyed or turned into makeshift shelters and 100 percent of the students don’t have access to education, how “too much reading”—their standard complaint—is a wonderful problem to have. But no one asks. They are reluctant to speak in a charged environment. So I open space for them to share. At the very least, discussing Palestine will not be a taboo.

In our critical race theory class, we’re covering the last chapter of Ruth Wilson Gilmore’s Golden Gulag. My voice cracks as I read to them: “If the twentieth century was the age of genocide on a planetary scale, then in order not to repeat history, we ought to prioritize coming to grips with dehumanization.”

Though my university likes to boast about its faculty in the news, it has avoided mentioning me for the past three months. I’m grateful it’s not worse. Despite 12,000 complaints and congressional interventions, our teach-in on “Race, Liberation, and Palestine” in early December was not canceled. Meanwhile, at UPenn, donors are calling for the resignation of my colleagues for chanting for freedom “from the river to the sea.” At Harvard, protesting students have been doxxed by roaming trucks plastered with their faces and names. Our Students for Justice in Palestine chapter became the first to be suspended at a public university. Suspensions, punishments, and threats mount at nearly every campus in the country.

After the last student leaves, I put down my mask. I pretend to be OK here, too.

On my commute home, I take calls: about a campaign to address the United Nations’ inefficacy from within; about a nascent effort to organize artists; about legal strategies to supplement and amplify our International Criminal Court petition… I’ll never be able to respond to everyone.

Once home, I rush to set up a makeshift studio for a live TV interview. Even before I am done, the angry e-mails are pouring in.

“Poor Hamas, right? You are a morally depraved black hole.”

“You are like poison…. Thank goodness my children are not exposed to you.”

“Go to Palestine so we can kill you too.”

I also receive remarkable messages. People around the world, enthusiastically supporting freedom, who ask over and over again: “What can I do?”

I’m late again. I rush to pick up my daughter, who is embarrassed by my tear-stained face. She likes to joke that I sound the same when I laugh and cry. That always makes me laugh. At the park, we find the sidewalk colorfully chalked with the words “Kids say no to genocide.” My heart pops with the promise of the generations to come.

The evening is filled with Al Jazeera Arabic, a refreshing reprieve from US media coverage. I tape a podcast, jump on an emergency Zoom. More e-mails come in, more speaking invitations, some that I know will be canceled. History didn’t begin on October 7, so why are we asked to teach everything from scratch again?

It’s past midnight. I get into bed and back on my phone. I witness and listen intently. I cry with my eyes shut, and I wish to wake to the news of a cease-fire.

 

We Were Children Once

Ahmed Moor

Anyone who has been to Gaza knows it’s a place of children. They are everywhere. Little girls and boys underfoot, in the streets, arrayed on sandy curbs. They reach into your pockets and make fun of you. Boys on carts pulled by donkeys, peddling goods in tattered clothing and barefoot, baked brown by an unrelenting summer sun. That’s the Gaza I remember.

I was born in Rafah in 1984, in the refugee camp there. My family moved when I was young. My father, an orphan who started kindergarten at an UNRWA school at the age of 9 and worked as a child porter for Egyptian soldiers before picking oranges in Israel after 1967, got us out. He finished school and university in Beirut—the only passport available to the Palestinians, then and now—and secured a job with an American NGO. But we went back to Gaza every summer until I was 15, when the Second Intifada started. I haven’t been back since.

My earliest memories of Gaza: I remember summer evenings fragrant with jasmine, bright with the Milky Way and the sodium lights of Rafiah Yam, the nearby Jewish settlement, a different kind of bright, searing against the darkness of the Strip. I remember rushing off into the night with other boys, to build plastic bonfires in the dunes and smoke dried molokhia stems, pretending we had cigarettes. And by day, sledding down those same dunes on discarded corn oil containers.

I remember the summer a boy was buried alive when a dune collapsed in his wake. An apocryphal story, or a portentous one…

I remember trudging through the sandy lanes with my mother to the local telephone operator to call my father, who could rarely join us on those trips home. And I recall, years later, the thrill of watching as the first crew of laborers built a network of telephone exchanges in our corner of Gaza. I remember riding my bike past those high dunes, past Rafiah Yam, and through the checkpoint where Israeli men, armed then, as now, to the teeth, plied small cruelties for fun. I remember “Shlomo’s bar” on the beach, which served Palestinian laborers Heineken beer in glass bottles. The prickly pear groves with their fruit—so much like Gaza—sweet, but too often painful.

The dunes are gone now. The sand was used for cinder blocks, the ubiquitous building material in Gaza, where the number of small children has only grown with time. My memories come back to me, relentlessly, with the force of guilt and loss, as I watch the videos of what’s being done to those children, more than 10,000 of them now. In one, a cameraman sweeps past a collection of small feet, the only visible parts of small bodies, crushed to death under a collapsed roof in Gaza as they slept. The dunes of my youth turned to cinder blocks, children buried alive under their weight. A timeless story for the children of Gaza, not apocryphal at all.

Lately, I catch myself thinking strange thoughts. I imagine a dying sun, eight billion years from now, swallowing the earth and turning everything to ash. I know I am not alone, and I recognize the dark fantasies of a broken spirit.

And then my children, alive, beautiful, and vivacious—three little girls—wake me from my grim reveries. They pull me back from the precipice. Unknowingly, they hold the genocide at bay. They are too young to know what’s being done to their family, so far away from everything in their lives. I write this love letter to Gaza’s children, whose lives are brief and whose deaths are meaningless. I write this letter for all the people in Gaza, who were children once, if only briefly, before the awareness of their own worthlessness crept into their lives. I write this letter for myself, and I wonder, when all the children in Gaza are dead, who will pull us back from the precipice?
 

A scene from Dearborn, Mich.: In one of Michigan's Arab American strongholds, a pro-Palestine protest greeted a visit from Joe Biden.
A scene from Dearborn, Mich.: In one of Michigan’s Arab American strongholds, a pro-Palestine protest greeted a visit from Joe Biden. (Seth Herald / AFP via Getty Images)

Occupied by Hope

Noor Hindi

Noor Hindi
(Jeffrey Smith)

Recently, I asked my father a simple question: “Is there hope?”

I was standing in my kitchen in Dearborn, Mich., slicing mangoes. Peering through the doorway, I saw him as I’ve always seen him: squinting at his phone, his body collapsed on a couch, a tired look on his face.

He had already turned on the news.

I have never been to Palestine. But the chaos of headlines about our homeland is something I am all too familiar with. So is the history that haunts us.

As a child, I was lulled to sleep by the sound of Al Jazeera as I lay on my father’s lap. At family gatherings, I listened to our stories: my grandmother surviving the Nakba at 5 years old; my father’s upbringing in the Qalandia refugee camp; the trees my great-grandfather planted around his house in Al-Qubab (now Ramleh), one of 418 Palestinian villages destroyed between 1948 and 1949.

One night last year, I dreamed of Palestine. In the dream, I was kneeling alongside my father, a handful of Palestine’s soil in my mouth. I awoke gasping for water, an emptiness in my throat, a hollowness in my body.

I am familiar with emptiness, the cavities of its grief, its hands around my neck. I called my dad later that day.

“We are going to Palestine,” I said. “October 2024.”

He made one simple demand: He wished to go in August. “For fig season,” he said, and I could hear his smile through the phone.

I want to taste Palestine’s bitter earth. For years, I have grieved its soil without ever having touched it. I want to find the exact location of my hurt, the coordinates of my emptiness. I want and I want. Lately, I have been demanding.

At a recent protest in Dearborn, I detached myself from the crowd and stood under a tree. I was trying to catch my breath. I played hide-and-seek with my body, begging my feet to find the ground they were standing on, to find comfort in a country I am not built for.

I watched a father chase after his son. The boy was barefoot. Hysterical with laughter. He picked up a single red leaf. He flung it in the air. He was a mess of joy, of life.

I don’t know what future we are leaving him.

For months, Gazans have made the violence they are facing at the hands of Israel indisputable. Before mourning, before reckoning with all they have lost, before even allowing Allah himself to bear witness to such tragedy, they point their cameras.

I refuse to re-create most of these images here. To describe what is indescribable. But here is what I can say.

In October, doctors in Gaza held a press conference at Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital. A sea of dead Gazan children, their tiny bodies wrapped in white cloth, surrounded them. And yet, Israel continues to kill thousands more. The world watches.

In November, Gazan children held their own press conference in front of Al-Shifa Hospital. They spoke in English. They begged us to protect them. And yet, Israel continues to kill thousands more. The world watches.

On Instagram, Gazans like Motaz Azaiza and Bisan Owda, armed only with their phones and their voices, are broadcasting their own genocide—the constant bombardment, the mass displacement, the poisoning of the water, the starvation of the people, the endless grief. And yet, Israel continues to kill thousands more. The world watches.

What more needs to be seen?

Palestinians do not get to mourn our dead. We must argue our humanity, must make our trauma irrefutable, must prove over and over again that we do not deserve our fate. It has been 75 years and counting.

This is the genesis of my frustration, the private anguish lurking in the background of my everyday movements: We have nothing but the stories we use as shields. And this is not enough.

There is little that is more dislocating than witnessing the genocide of your own people: on Twitter, on Instagram, in waiting rooms at doctors’ offices, on the radio, and during all the mundane tasks of survival. There is little that is more demoralizing than watching the world deny a violence that is so simply seen, heard, and broadcast by the people experiencing it themselves.

I have become impatient with the headlines. With “solutions.” With the empire’s demand that we treat this crisis as “complex”—a demand that only seems to arise when the people dying are Palestinian. With the insistence that every conversation start with October 7, when we know that was far from the beginning of this crisis.

I refuse. I want my country back. This is not complicated.

I am writing for a future I no longer know is possible. I am making art for a future I no longer know is possible. I am dreaming of a Palestine I may never encounter.

Yet still, I am dreaming.

When I ask my father, “Is there hope?,” his response is swift.

“Of course there is hope.”

“From where?” I ask.

“I haven’t let go of my hope.”

Here is the truth about being Palestinian: In this lifetime, and the one after, and the one thereafter, we will always choose Palestine. There is little that endures more than our hope.

In the face of the unimaginable, this is what I hold on to.
 

Protesters occupying the Manhattan Bridge in New York City.
Sending a message: Protesters occupying the Manhattan Bridge in New York City. (Kena Betancur / AFP via Getty Images)

The Question

Mohammed El-Kurd

Mohammed el-Kurd
(Ryan Brand)

At a recent closed-door meeting in London to discuss BDS with various publishers and writers, a well-intentioned, well-known author asked me if Zionism could hold a double meaning: To some, it is a settler-colonial movement motivated by expansion and racial elimination, and to others it is a movement for Jewish self-determination. “No,” I said. “Zionism is best defined by its material manifestations—the most recent being genocide. It is irrelevant whether it could contain multitudes.” At the time, the death toll in the besieged Gaza Strip was approaching 20,000, and our martyred friend and poet Refaat Al-Areer was among the thousands yet to be retrieved from the rubble. The suggestion that I would have the patience for theoretical discussions felt profane.

Yet conversations about Palestine in the West are steered by abstractions and hypotheticals—about the meaning of Zionism, about the threat level of words, about a logistically impossible yet impossibly imminent genocide of the Jewish people. (Apparently, I am supposed to clarify that I do believe the Holocaust happened.) You almost feel as though you are the victim of an elaborate, callous joke.

The morning I sat down to write this, a nurse and journalist named Yousef Mema published photos of the decomposing corpses of Palestinians murdered in the north of Gaza—a skull, a rib cage, and foot bones protruding through jeans. They had been exposed to the harsh elements for the past 80 days, he explained, because heavy Israeli bombardment and ground incursions had “prevented paramedics from reaching the martyrs.”

Meanwhile, in another world, Zionist college students were busy decrying the threat posed by pro-Palestinian demonstrations on campus, then testifying about this threat in front of Congress, while young Palestinians were being gunned down or stabbed by white supremacists. At first, I had Norman Finkelstein in my ear, accusing these students of crocodile tears. Of feigning fear. But it cannot only be performance: despite the nukes and the promised homeland, their fear is so visceral it can conjure the Gestapo in the halls of the Ivy Leagues. 

To be Palestinian today is to feel like you are caught in a fever dream—trapped in someone else’s hallucination, where the question “What happens to the settlers?” is offered with more urgency than questions about the welfare of six million stateless Palestinian refugees who are scattered around the world. It is to be interrogated about the hidden insidiousness of our chants, while Israeli politicians boast about ethnically cleansing Gaza in newspapers and interviews. It is to be shouted over, silenced, by people who claim to fear for their lives from the safety of apartments that have never been blistered by white phosphorus—that have endured nothing fiercer than a US winter—while people in another corner of the planet dig for loved ones buried beneath the rubble of demolished buildings.

Such details are not minor. In situating the Holocaust outside of history, in placing it not just in the past but in an eternal future, Zionism today has created a status quo in which the possibility of a second holocaust is given primacy over a holocaust happening in the present. I am certain some readers will find those previous lines uncomfortable or even incendiary, but that is precisely the point: Language comparing Zionists to Nazis is scrutinized—even penalized—more than the government policies and military actions that beg for the analogy to be made.

Distracting questions—“Can Zionism mean different things?”; “Is anti-Zionism antisemitism?”—feed the discursive loop that prioritizes a conjectural “day after” over the material present. But here, in the present, there are more pressing questions: What are the mental and muscular consequences of being forced to transform a taxi into a hearse? What becomes of the nurse whose shift is interrupted by the arrival of her husband’s corpse on a stretcher? What about the father carrying what remains of his son in two separate plastic bags? What happens to him after all of this death, once he is alone and away from the cameras? What kind of man will the boy carrying his brother’s limbs in a bag grow up to be?

We on the outside simply do not understand what life inside Gaza does to a person. We know the facts: The 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza—which has been declared “uninhabitable” by the UN—have been under siege for 16 years. Two-thirds of them are refugees or the descendants of dispossessed refugees; half of them are children; and many of them have lived their entire lives under blockade, their calendars marked by routine bombardments. Sometimes these facts are produced to contextualize and historicize the violence coming out of Gaza; more often they are obfuscated to depoliticize and mystify that violence.

But in either case, neither the well-intentioned nor the ill-intentioned truly contend with the magnitude of these facts or the truth they lay bare: Gaza is a place like no other. Here is a world governed solely by its severed geography. People here live encircled by an abundance that they are owed, and yet within this world, the water is most likely undrinkable, passage is impossible, and food—like the people themselves—needs a passport. Massacres are both televised and denied. And all the while, the world’s superpowers aid and abet our annihilation—explicitly, institutionally, and materially—then berate us about the meaning of human rights and the myth of Israeli self-defense. We are, to them, an unfortunate complication of an otherwise acceptable status quo.

As long as this status quo persists, as long as Palestinians are subjected to colonial violence and erasure, as long as the people of Gaza continue to defy the genocide being waged against them, we who are living outside the concentration camp certainly can, and should, refuse indignity as a state of being, refuse to shrink ourselves and our aspirations, refuse to assuage the hallucinations of our colonizers or be silenced or shouted over. In the last three months, the world changed forever. We all should act accordingly. 
 

Do You See What I See?

Laila Al-Arian

Laila Al-Arian
(Courtesy of Laila Al-Arian)

I put down my phone just before closing my eyes to sleep, a final break from the endless stream of horrific news from Gaza. The last posts I see are chilling: Palestinians in Gaza describing the ferocity of Israel’s bombing campaign, many of the posts declaring “This is the worst night” yet. Then there are the videos. The screams of terror as 2,000-pound bombs hit homes, the flares of bright orange illuminating Gaza’s night skies, and the billowing smoke that follows.

The cycle repeats as night turns into day. I reach for my phone as soon as I wake up and see posts of Gazans taking stock of the events of the previous night: who was killed, who was rescued from the rubble, who was shot by snipers while fleeing for their safety and waving a white flag.

In the videos, children shake uncontrollably, covered in dust after an air strike, silent and bewildered. The number of children killed and wounded, their limbs amputated, without anesthesia in far too many cases, is so massive that the UN has called Gaza “a graveyard for children.” Gaza is where Palestinian children go to sleep hungry, where they hold a press conference to beg the world to stop their killing, and where parents write their children’s names on their arms and legs in case they need to find them beneath the rubble.

Every time I see a video, photo, or post, I wonder if others are seeing it too—especially Americans, whose tax dollars provide much of the arms for Israel’s bombardment. Are they seeing what I’m seeing? I ask over and over again, as each day brings a new brutality that I didn’t think was possible.

Israel cut off food, water, fuel, and electricity to Gaza.

It wiped out entire bloodlines.

It stripped men and boys down, photographed, kidnapped, beat, and tortured them.

It executed 11 men in front of their families.

It destroyed cemeteries.

It killed people digging graves for others Israel had previously killed.

It killed a 12-year-old girl who was recovering in a hospital after losing her leg in an earlier air strike that killed her family.

It bombed a hospital live on Al Jazeera. It bombed so many hospitals.

It bombed churches, mosques, schools, universities, UN shelters, fishing boats, food storage sites, and bakeries for starving people and convoys of fleeing refugees.

It used white phosphorus, which causes severe burns and even penetrates through bones.

It killed dozens of journalists and even their family members.

It left premature babies to die and then shot the journalist who exposed the story of their decomposing bodies.

I know that if this were happening somewhere else, it would merit wall-to-wall coverage in the United States. Instead, much of what I learn comes from social media and independent or international news outlets.

Israel has barred foreign journalists from entering Gaza unless they are embedded with their military, but even that fact, which would provoke outrage if another country were doing it, has barely made a ripple. Instead, it has fallen on Palestinians to tell their own story—the reporters targeted and killed in record numbers, and the citizen journalists using their phones to capture displacement, starvation, injuries, and death, all evidence of war crimes for which Israel will almost certainly never be held accountable.

It’s difficult enough to see the terror unleashed on Gaza’s 2.3 million people, nearly half of whom are children. But the complicity and justification from Western countries that have lectured others about human rights for decades makes it unbearable. And then there is the gaslighting, those who deny that any of this is happening at all and claim, for instance, that a dead Palestinian baby is actually a doll.

I am consumed by my feelings—of sadness, grief, and rage—but feel guilty for dwelling on them and even for living life, eating while people are starving, drinking while they are thirsty, sleeping in a warm bed while they are bombed in theirs or sleeping outside in the cold. We Palestinians in the diaspora know that it is fate alone—decisions made by or for our grandparents—that separates us from those in Gaza who are once again enduring Israel’s brutality.

In October, I watched a video of two young brothers in the aftermath of an Israeli air strike. The older one, whose face was stained with blood, stood over his younger brother, who was lying down, his head bandaged and face and chest covered in blood. The older boy, no more than 10, was whispering to him to say the declaration of faith that Muslims say when they’re dying. This was one of countless videos of Palestinians confronted with the violent deaths of their loved ones, saying goodbye, crying over them in disbelief, and kissing their dead bodies over and over again.

These moments of horrific intimacy are filmed because those who suffer and witness them want to show the world that this really happened. But as the death toll reaches 25,000 (the number is likely much higher given the bodies under the rubble), I wonder if there is a cost to all the images we’re seeing, if they inure people to Palestinian death, if there’s no point in intruding on their most vulnerable moments, since those in power have not been moved to stop the carnage.

The day after I saw the video of the two brothers, their images still running through my mind, I asked a member of Congress if he would support the call for a cease-fire. “They’ve been fighting each other for thousands of years,” he responded. It was galling. “That’s not true,” I responded. “It’s been 75 years. My grandparents became refugees after Israel was created.” “Thousands of years,” he responded, walking away.

This level of ignorance can only come from decades of demonizing Palestinians as “human animals” and “children of darkness” to justify killing them en masse even in the face of the indisputable fact that 70 percent of those killed are children, women, and the elderly. Are they seeing what I’m seeing?

Most of the videos from Gaza show graphic horror and heartbreaking loss: a child, whose face is covered in blood, writhing and screaming in pain; a father shouting the names of his children as he searches for them under the rubble; a mother screaming in disbelief that her children were killed while they were hungry. But I have found that mundane and familiar footage of everyday life before this onslaught is haunting in its own way. In one video, a young dental school graduate named Abdallah Baghdadi sits in the back of a jeep, wearing a black baseball cap, while on vacation in Turkey, a brief respite from the weight of living under Gaza’s blockade. He is smiling, carefree, full of life. Abdallah’s grieving friend posted it after he was killed on October 30, to remember him as she knew him.

In the first three weeks of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, I found out that my mother lost 17 members of her extended family in two separate strikes. We had never met them because of Israel’s 17-year siege of Gaza, which has cut off the tiny strip from the world and made it nearly impossible for anyone to visit. I’ve learned that it’s possible to mourn people I’ve never met, like the poet and professor Refaat Alareer, who was killed along with members of his family. Refaat was one of the founders of “We Are Not Numbers,” a nonprofit that cultivated young writers from Gaza to tell their stories to make sure they don’t become statistics. But in the face of so much relentless death, it feels daunting to make sure that each person Israel has killed does not become just a number. How long does it take to recite 25,000 names?

We even worry about the dead in Gaza, as Israel attacks cemeteries throughout the strip. I think about what will become of my late grandfather, who returned to Gaza in 2004 after living abroad as a refugee for much of his life because he wanted to die in his homeland. My grandfather survived Israeli bombardments in 2008, 2012, and 2014. But he can’t rest even in death.

What will be left for the people of Gaza when Israel finally ends its campaign of terror? It has destroyed everything that makes a place livable in its determination to end life itself in Gaza, to separate the people from the land. How does life go on when you’re surrounded by rubble and mass graves, by children who lost their limbs before they learned to walk, who lost their parents before they learned how to say their names?

Outside of Gaza, to be a Palestinian in this moment is to go through the motions of life while feeling dead inside. It feels like it should be a state of emergency, but all around us life goes on. People do their grocery shopping, gather for the holidays, and blow out their birthday candles, while we are overcome by powerlessness and grief. To be Palestinian right now is to feel betrayed by those who remain silent, whatever their reasons, and to feel gratitude and hope from those who have spoken up.

It’s not just Palestinians, though. So many people have told me that this is a life-defining moment for them that has shaped their views in profound ways. Those people have seen what I’ve seen.

Something has broken in all of us, and we will never be the same.

 

ABOUT THE AUTHORS:

 

Noura Erakat

Noura Erakat (@4noura on Twitter), a human rights attorney and activist, is an associate professor at Rutgers University—New Brunswick, and a contributing editor of Jadaliyya. She is the author of Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine (Stanford University Press).

 

Ahmed Moor

Ahmed Moor is a writer and activist. He lives in Philadelphia.

 

Noor Hindi

Noor Hindi is a Palestinian-American poet and reporter. Her debut collection of poems, Dear God. Dear Bones. Dear Yellow, was an honorable mention for the Arab American Book Award.

 

Mohammed El-Kurd

Mohammed El-Kurd is a writer and poet from Jerusalem, occupied Palestine, currently serving as The Nation's first-ever Palestine Correspondent. He is the author of RIFQA (Haymarket) and the forthcoming nonfiction project tentatively-titled A Million States In One (Haymarket). His 2023 Edward Said Memorial Lecture at Princeton will be adapted into a book.

 

Laila Al-Arian

Laila Al-Arian is an investigative journalist and filmmaker, and an executive producer of Fault Lines, a documentary program on Al Jazeera English.